Reply #6: Carter's heart is in the right place

[fujiyama]

but one important thing to note is that Japan, Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, and Argentina don't face any major hostile nuclear powers on their borders. Japan is the closest in that they face a threat from,NK, but Japan is still under a US defense agreement (I believe that to be the case). The US wouldn't allow Japan to be attacked, and if Japan were attacked did the US would likely retaliate. India faces China and Pakistan, both of whom are friendly with each other and have nuclear agreements of their own.

Also, people need to understand that India will not sign the NPT anytime soon. Forty nukes isn't 400 as Carter himself pointed out. Also, India isn't interested in being dictated by a communist dictatorship, and four other powers, several of which are now peripheral anyways.

While I think the way Bush "promised" the agreement was arrogant (he doesn't have the power to agree to something that needs to be debated and then voted on by congress), the deal doesn't even help their military nuclear program. I'd say it's better to bring some of India's nuclear reactors under international monitoring than having none. If India were to violate the terms, then the deal would obviously be broken.

I understand the concerns of proliferation and share them, but at this point, I think the NPT has to be revisited, not necessarily trashed as Bolton and Bush likely want, but it's effectiveness is now questionable considering the way NK has violated it (and possibly Iran has as well). Also, I am a little amused by the international outcry now with this deal. The world didn't seem to care very much when China struck several nuclear agreements with Pakistan...or when they transferred missile technology to them...